The Last King of Scotland showcased a lot in that short clip. As the viewer, you can see all of the shortcomings of completed staff work. Both Idi Amin, the dictator, and Nicholas, the advisor/physician, are at fault. Neither of them acted as a good leader or even a decent follower. Their relationship lacks the basic foundation of trust and beleaf in each other. Nickolas knew the proper decision for Idi Amin to make but he failed to convey that to his leader. This is a bad look because as the advisor he should have put more effort in. He really needed to convince Idris of the proper decision but was too afraid to push his opinion. This is a bad follower because he let his leader make the wrong decision. Idi Amin was a bad leader because he is constantly making the wrong decisions and listing to no one. Both Idi Amin and Nicholas need to work on their completed staff work skills and knowledge.
This is an excellent video to emphasize the value of communication and persuasion. As an individual contributor, you must be able to speak properly and persuasively, especially when dealing with a dictator like Idi Amin. Persuading your employer to take your advice is a part of the Completed Staff Work. Despite the fact that the boss takes the final choice, the individual contributor is relied upon to provide excellent advise. This may entail conducting research and drafting a business plan. Other times, it just entails giving immediate guidance. Regardless, as an individual contributor, you must be able to clearly and confidently deliver that guidance. Nicholas did offer advice in the video, but he appeared reluctant and unsure about it. As a result, Nicholas failed to persuade Idi Amin as an individual contributor. He failed to perform his duties. If the contributor lacks aggressiveness, CSW will be ineffective. Idi Amin, despite being a dictator, had every right to be enraged at Nicholas. Amin puts his faith in Nicholas to guide him, but Nicholas disappoints him at first. This is what āmanaging your managerā entails.
Influencing peopleās behavior without duress through communication is an aspect many people do not possess. In the article ābut you did not persuade me,ā I think Nicholas is at fault for not persuading the megalomaniac dictator Idi Amin. When Nicholas was taking the job to be Idi Aminās advisor, he knew the task ahead of him was tough. As a dictator advisor, he had to have something more than just good communication skills and persuasion. Therefore, when āthe bossā wanted to throw away the Asians, he did not persuade him enough not to do it but instead, he kept quiet.
Choices have consequences, and Idi Amin knew there would be a backlash. However, it was Nicholasās responsibility to persuade him, even if it meant losing his life for it. Persuasion serves a significant purpose in society; a person who cannot convince others can miss on great opportunities. Therefore, Nicholasās job as an advisor is to persuade his dictator boss to drop ambitions on things that could hurt him or the country. However, he chose to be lenient, probably because he still wanted to keep his job. Public servants must be persuasive because actions by their superiors have consequences on the entire country. Therefore, Nicholas should have been fired for failing to persuade his boss enough to drop his ambitions because he knew he had to deal with a dictator.
In this scene from The Last King of Scotland I believe that the Idi Amin is at fault. As an advisor it is always important to be able to persuade others especially your direct supervisor/superior on what to do in certain situations, but it is also important for that supervisor to be able to trust their subordinates without a great deal of persuasion. I believe that if Nicholas really was an advisor to Idi Amin that their relationship would also be a bit different. Idi Amin put all of the blame on Nicholas for the dilemma but in the end, Idi Amin let it get out. I believe that if the two had trust in each other and used better communication skills this issue would not have occurred. In the end I do believe that Idi Amin was at fault for his actions of not listening.
In this scene from The Last King of Scotland I believe both characters are at fault in this situation, but I definitely think Idi Amin is more at fault. Garrigan, as an advisor, must learn how to tell Idi Amin exactly what he wants to hear, the way he wants to hear it. Just because an idea makes sense to an advisor, does not mean the idea will enter the dictatorās head the same way. An advisor must persuade. But we have learned in this class being a leader also means you must follow. Being open to the ideas of others and listening to them at the moment is a key factor in leading a group of people working towards a common goal.
I think this scene is a perfect example of how completed staff work done wrong can lead to consequences. Although I see both at fault, the advisor was the trusted one and should have known the dictator even better to be able to sell him his advice. As staff members doing completed staff work, we should be able to convince our managers what decisions should be taken. Being able to persuade the manager should come easier to us because we should already know what approach will convince our managers. If we do not know, then that says a lot of the relationship and that we should work on that relationship in order to build trust. Trust that will be useful when telling the manager things they do not want to hear, but know they should hear because they trust you. Now for the dictator, they did not listen nor were they open about suggestions. From learning to be leaders from followership, the take away should be to be open to ideas from the staff and listen to even the most difficult or unwanted conversations.
This The Last King of Scotland scene shows two characters who do not do a good job at adapting to their situation. Starting with Nicholas, he needed to anticipate the hesitancy of Idi Amin and craft his advisement in a way that seems appealing to Idi Amin. Nicholas also needed to do a better job of being stern with his point and not to be so worried about what Idi Amin might respond to his idea. If Nicholas truly believed in his idea, he would do whatever he could to convince Idi Amin. But, Idi Amin is also at fault here as well. As a higher up than Nicholas, Idi Amin needs to be open to hearing suggestions from his subordinates. Just like we learned in class, being a good leader means being a good follower. By trusting in what Nicholas says, Idi Amin shows qualities of being a good leader. Having such ātunnel-visionā actually hurts Idi Amin in this situation, and as a result, he is to blame as well. In conclusion, both parties here are at fault as both have failed to communicate effectively. Nicholas failed to persuade effectively and Idi failed to being open, which led to them failing to reach a higher goal.
This is a perfect example of failed completed staff work as the relationship between the boss and subordinate did not work out well due to ineffective communication and persuasion. In my views, in this film, the Nicholas is at false side as he came out as a failed advisor as he was not communicated the right advice and suggestions to the boss and hence failed to perform his duties well. Following his advice is completely in the hands of the Amin, but the Nicholas is bound to provide him the best suggestions and the alternatives to improve the situation. But instead of advising well, he decided to persuade his boss, which is a clean example of failed staff work. The Idli Amin is also at fault as he never gives attention to the Nicholas advises seriously and made decisions according to his own will which is also wrong from the managerās point of view. Therefore, I believe it is a joint effort and the success is only achieved when both the subordinate and the boss is willing to perform the duties well and contribute their best interest at work. The best way to deal with the situation is to entail a better relationship between the two by improving the communication channels.
This clip is a perfect example of how communication can be key in peopleās relationships. The words we choose to say can have a great impact on how others react. In this clip Idi Amin says to Nicholas that he did not persuade him in the way he spoke, so he went against his advice. If Nicholas had been more persuasive, then Idi Amin may not have been in as much trouble as he was now. Persuading people means convincing them without a shadow of a doubt that your plan will be successful. This is like Completed Staff Work in the sense that you should only bring ideas and projects to the bossās desk that are completely thought out and should have nothing else to add; otherwise it can be a waste of the bossās time. Nicholas may have thought his previous plan would work, but he did not convince Idi Amin that it would work. In this clip Idi Amin is desperate for help, and thus, it is easier for Nicholas to convince him of his new plan. Idi Amin trusted Nicholas to give him good advice, and he did; however if he had trusted him from the beginning, then they would likely not be in this mess.
In this clip, I believe that it is Nicholasā fault for my persuading his boss in making the right decision. I do not think that Idi handled the situation in the best way, although I do understand that he was very stressed about the given situation. Nicholas has the job of managing his manager. When Ibi asked Nicolas why he made him make that poor decision, Nicholas responded by saying that he did tell him what to do. Nicholas told Ibi his opinion on the situation, but he was not persuasive in why his idea was a good one, and what repercussions might arise if he did not follow Nicholasā advice. This is a good example of bad completed staff work because the communication and trust between the staffer and their boss were not up to par, which ultimately caused big problems.
This was a very interesting video to view and an article to review. I think that the author of the article does a very good job of explicating explaining this. Leading by example is something that is very important in leadership. Often you hear leaders say ādo what I say and not what I doā. I think that this is very interesting because followers who want to become leaders are looking to these leaders for their guidance and leading by example. I recently met with the CEO of my company and he said something profound during our meeting he said āI am the rule and not the exception to the rule so I expect to be called out if I break my own rulesā. I think that this was important because he has a great understanding that it is important to follow his own rules if he wants other people to follow him. Overall I think that some leaders often make themselves the exception and it is important that if you want to be a great leader you need to lead by example.
Hi Margaret. Welcome to the community. 
Indeed, this is how it should be, but too many are of this mindset:
That is a recipe for eventual failure.
Completed Staff Work is about being the āinvisibleā shadow of your boss. His best friend. His problem-solver, or problem-avoider. Also, sometimes is not easy to be perfect. This video shows how doing things well not always means being perfect. The advisor clearly was confused when hearing the boss screams, because he indeed DID give the correct advise to him. The problem here is that he did not have the ability to persuade him. This could sound picky, but persuation is NEEDED when we want the communication to be efective. Without knowing all the context, maybe Nicholas needed to have more confidence with his boss and have done things better, because bosses are not always with their ears opened, theyāre mostly busy and they donāt want to lose their time with you. It is also your job to make them feel not only comfortable around you, but also to earn that trust with them, that will lead them to actually hear what you say and will even make the persuassion not necessary. Bosses are not easy during difficult times, but if you did your job when times were easy, boss will trust you anytime.
I believe it is Nicholasā fault for not mastering the art of persuasion as an employee. In completed staff work, we are taught that the employee should be able to anticipate what the boss needs and be able to take on any of their tasks in order to make their job easier. The boss has a lot on their plate, and does not need to be hassled by these smaller tasks. The art of persuasion is also important. It is imperative to have the ability to persuade the boss in intense situations, particularly if you know what is best for the boss and the company. In Nicholasā case, he could have taken note of his bossā antics and anticipated him not to be persuaded so easily, causing him to give a better effort,
This story shows the steps to take in order to make the right decision. The people surrounding the superior are trustworthy and have good relationships with each other. They are each in a position for them to succeed. While recommending what is best overall, they must also be convincing and persuasive in their thinking while presenting their argument to their superior in a way that displays why they are going in the right direction. In regards to who is at fault in this situation, it would be Nicholas because he did not sell his idea. His argument was not presented in a way that made his idea displayed as the best. Idi cannot be blamed for not listening since Nicholas did not articulate it correctly. A weak recommendation can easily slip through the cracks if it is not good enough. A beneficial recommendation would always be remembered and put into effect. Idi heard Nicholasā idea but he was not persuaded by it. This is the perfect example of what not to do in Completed Staff Work.
Ultimately, I think the responsibility has to fall on Nicholas. Even though Idi Amin didnāt listen, it is on us as completed staffers to make sure that we are recommending and getting through to our management. In this case we can see Nicholas does not view it as his point to make it across, however Idi views him as an advisor. As we learned throughout our course, it is ultimately responsible in us to make sure that we are fully recommending the decision-making process. If Nicholas was to follow what we learned here and completed staff work, the issue that idea is facing would not be prevalent. Nicholasās voice would have been heard through the execution taught to us in this course. However, we cannot fully control what the decision making process is, we can strongly influence it though. Nicholas has to understand this going forward, and he fully does understand after Idi tells him. Nicholas then makes a recommendation to keep the junglist in the country, and Idi feels relieved. He understands that decision heās about to make his coming from his advisor, and he fully supports it. Unlike what happened initially, this is the correct way for completed staff work and for Nicholas to act.
I believe that it would be unjust to say that one of these individuals alone is at fault. I think that they both are to blame to some extent, and both of them couldāve executed things better. I believe that Amin is a terrible boss. He is abrasive, a bully, and overall does not know how to be a boss that staff members are able to work with. A good boss would listen attentively to the advice of staff members and decide to trust them and then go forth and implement that advice. Amin did not do that, and rather ignored the advice that Nicholas provided the first time around. Despite this, Nicholas still could have done a few things differently to be more effective as a staff member for Amin. Nicholas should have been so persuasive, that the advice he offered did not seem like a suggestion, but rather the only possible choice. If Nicholas had a strong enough argument, even someone as stubborn as Amin would have listened and taken the advice because he trusted Nicholasā opinions and feedback. Neither one of these individuals is entirely to blame, but it is important to notice each of their strengths and weaknesses. Staff members must be persuasive in their arguments, and bosses must listen to feedback, otherwise the staffās job is pointless.
In this scenario, I think they are both at fault. I would say that Nicholas is at fault because, like Idi Amin said, he wasnāt āpersuasiveā enough. As an employee, we need to persuade our boss to believe that our solution to a problem is the best option for them. Nicholas was not able to be persuasive enough. On the other hand, Idi Amin is at fault because he did not listen to Nicholas. Nicholasā idea was still a good one, regardless of how persuasive he was, but Idi Amin decided not to listen to him. Also, at the end of the day, everyone is responsible for their own action, so Idi Amin could have chosen to do the right thing, but he did not and it back fired on him.
I believe that Nicholas could have sold his idea in a more effective manner to Idi Amin. For this reason, I think that Nicholas is the one at fault. The basis of completed staff work is the staffer providing the boss with a recommendation that he/she needs to quickly approve/disapprove in order to go make more decisions to benefit the organization. In this situation, Nicholas is not compelling enough to provide his boss (Idi Amin) with a recommendation that Idi Amin believes is suitable for the ongoing situation. No matter how crazy or horrible of a person Idi Amin may be, it is still the duty of Nicholas, as a staffer, to do completed staff work: provide his boss with a recommendation that only needs to be approved.
In fact, if Nicholas were to have fulfilled the basis of completed staff work, there would be no need for this scene to have ever occurred. Instead, Idi Amin would have been making decisions for (hopefully) the benefit of his nation. To further, the duty of the boss is not to listen and negotiate with his/her staffers in order to make a decision or do good work. For this reason, Nicholas needs to be more compelling and give a better, more enticing recommendation in order to do completed staff work.
The short clip, shows Idi Amin asking Garrigan for advice on a previous discussion that had consequences. In this situation, they are both at fault. Garrigan is at fault because he did not persuade his boss to make the correct decision. Idi Amin is at fault for not listening to his advisor. At the end of the day, he is the boss and gets to make the final decision. Persuasion is a big topic and the center focus but also trust comes into play on both sides. Garrigan is responsible for presenting and convincing the boss to agree with his ideas. In completed staff work, the staff makes the suggestions to then present to the boss. The boss is then responsible for either agreeing with the suggestions or making modifications to them. The boss also needs to have trust in the staff to make good suggestions and guide the company in the right direction. This is the area where Idi Amin was at fault in. He should have had enough trust in Garrigan to agree with his advice and trust that he will not lead him in the wrong direction. If he listened to him then this situation could have been avoided. They are both at fault in this situation but from this experience, they can learn to grow from their mistakes.